Integrated Meta Model for Enterprise Modelling including Strategy, Business Architecture, Risk and Change

How can a single integrated meta model support strategy, business architecture, risk, and change across multiple EA frameworks — and why do existing approaches fall short?

These slides accompany the paper: Integrated Meta Model for Enterprise Modelling including Strategy, Business Architecture, Risk and Change

The major enterprise architecture frameworks each bring something valuable, but none are sufficient on their own. TOGAF covers IT domains reasonably well but lacks the contextual concepts — competitors, legislation, market forces, ecology — essential for genuine strategic planning. ArchiMate is more rigorous and consistent but weak on data modelling and context. BizBOK is focused but narrow. None of them, individually or together, provide a single coherent foundation for the full scope of strategy, business architecture, risk, change, and programme management that large transformation efforts demand.

This paper describes the development of HAL2023, the latest iteration of the Inspired Holistic Architecture Language — built by systematically analysing and synthesising TOGAF 10th Edition, ArchiMate 3.2, BizBOK 11, SABSA, MEMO, DODAF, and the accumulated Inspired consulting models. The result is a large but well-structured integrated meta model, expressed at three levels — rich pictures for executives, conceptual models for architects, and fully attributed models for tooling — and validated across projects in banking, telecommunications, assurance, retail, healthcare, and government. Notable enhancements in this revision include richer contextual coverage, rationalised relationship types, financial aspects, customer journeys, architecture scenarios, and improved integration with risk, governance, and initiative management.

Crucially, the paper is practical as well as theoretical: it explains how the model should be used incrementally rather than exhaustively, with teams populating only what is relevant to current goals — progressively expanding coverage as new questions arise, much like the way an ERP system delivers increasing value as more modules are adopted.

Originally published as a conference paper by Graham McLeod in the PoEM 2023 Companion Proceedings (16th IFIP Working Conference on the Practice of Enterprise Modeling), Vienna, 2023.

Should Banks Outsource Operations Processing? Drivers, Constraints, and the EA Angle

What drives and constrains outsourcing decisions in corporate and investment banking — and what role should enterprise architects play?

Outsourcing operations processing is a live and recurring challenge for executive leaders in corporate and investment banking — and the decision is rarely as simple as comparing internal and external costs. This 2013 presentation by SJ van der Westhuizen, delivered at the Inspired TOGAF/EA Forum in Johannesburg, draws on research across thirteen banking organisations to map the full set of forces at play, distinguishing clearly between what drives outsourcing and what constrains it.

On the driving side, the research identifies capability maturity, capital preservation, management focus, and the formalising effect of contracts as significant positive forces. On the constraining side, organisational form complexity, responsiveness to change, reputational risk, management culture fit, and capability maturity concerns about prospective vendors all emerge as meaningful brakes. Cost and revenue, often assumed to be the dominant drivers, are shown to be more nuanced than executives typically expect.

A particularly valuable thread running through the presentation is the specific contribution enterprise architecture can make at each decision point — from capability-based planning and CMMI assessment, to operating model design, TOGAF governance frameworks, and the business model canvas. The central conclusion is direct: the greater the level of EA maturity in an organisation, the greater the number of business objectives achievable through outsourcing.

Originally presented by SJ van der Westhuizen at the Inspired TOGAF/EA Forum, Johannesburg, July 2013.

Enhancing Enterprise Architecture Models with Cost, Quality and Risk Dimensions

How can enterprise architecture models be extended to capture cost, quality, and risk — and why does it matter?

Enterprise architecture models do an excellent job of mapping the structural relationships between business, process, application, information, and technology domains — but they have traditionally said little about cost, quality, and risk, the dimensions most relevant to the executives and managers who need to act on them. This 2003 presentation by Graham McLeod, delivered at the University of Cape Town in collaboration with Promis Solutions AG, makes the case that these dimensions are not separate concerns requiring separate tools — they can be woven directly into existing EA models. Drawing on the Inspired EA framework and its EVA repository, the presentation shows how cost centres can be linked to architecture elements and values derived through declarative formulas, how quality metrics can be attached to products, processes, applications, and platforms, and how risk can be incorporated as a further dimension of the model. A particularly useful insight is that most of the cost elements organisations need are already present in their architecture models — they simply need attributes added and a mechanism for accumulation and apportionment. The result is a single integrated view that allows strategic planners, architects, and business managers to evaluate current positions and future scenarios with proper appreciation for the full implications of their decisions.

Originally presented by Graham McLeod at the University of Cape Town, June 2003.